New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-02-21
THE GREAT STEWART TRUST,
Mr.. BUTLEIs SUIT AGAINST MR. HILTON.
CAN TIE Ex-JuDGE MAINTAIN HIS CONTROL OF rHn

CAN TIE Ex-JuDGE MAINTAIN HIS CONTROL OF THD
EsrATE-OPINIoNs ON THE CASE
OF the many attempts made to obtnin Cd
equitable distribution among tho heirs of the bulls
of the vast estate left by A. 4. Stewart, which
has practically remained intact since the death oA
the rich merchant, it is generally conceded BY
those who are familiar with court decisions In Will
cases of similar character that the action brougho
by Prescott Hall Butler, Mrs. Stewards nephcws
presents the greatest promise OF being successful
mere cursory glance OF the wording OF TWO OF
the four codicls Of the will executed by Mns
Stewart, In which trust Is formed and cx-Judge
Hilton is made the sole trustee, is pron0unced
sufficient to convince experienced lawyers, IRE
spective Of their prejudccs, that the document
in question comes well within the line OF thoss
which have hitherto been invalidated by tho
rulings OF the highest State courts. The trustee
Is practically unlimited as to the exercise of his
discretion and is not accountable to any one fop
The disposition made by him Of the undivided
half OF the residuary property intrstcd to him
to administer In effect the only object in Great
ing the trust is to "erect, furnish and endow q
seminary Of learning for women" at Garden City,
and even this is to be done only sin the dis
cretion' OF ex-Iudye Hilton and "if he shall con-
slider 1t expedient and proper
Notwithstanding the fact that the trust created
would be the recipient Of s15,000.0O0 at q low
estimate, and that such seminary as Mrs. Stewart
contemplated could be built, furnished and lib
orally endowed with 81 ,0OO, 900, the trustee has
the power, unconditionaly, Of doing pretty much
as he pltases with balance AZ least s14,00o,0oo.
BY the terms OF the fourth and
last codicl he is authorized TO con.
vey and transfer from time to time and at
any time any part Of the share OF my estate
ho, flolo 4 t,,f 81
the les;atecs named in my said will, and which In
his opinion will not be needed or required for the
purpose of tho trust" Mr.. Hilton,s it will be
seen, is made the sole judge as to which OF the
legatces shall be benefited by the surplus over the
amount required for the trust he alone must de.
eide how much one or all the lcgatees Is to re-
ccvc. and there is nothing to deter him from
concluding that the whole estate forming tha
Trust is requisite for carrying into effect the OBJ
jcct Of it. The indeiinitencss OF this and the
other trust clauses Of the will and the unusual
discretionary powers bestowed upon single
trustee are patent. and, 1t is claimed. II estab-
lshed prccedcnts may be regarded as guides, that
they will be declared void, since in cases closely
ANALOGOUS the Court Of Appeals has decided that
the formation Of posthumous trusts without
clearly definite purposes and the appointment OF
trustees with large discretionary powers are con-
trary to public policy andAthe spirit of the law
governing tcstamcntary instruments.
In discussing the action brought by Mr. ButleI
eH-Judgc Horace Russell, Mr. IIiltons brotherin|
law and legal adviser plainly shows that he gives
more weight to the allegation that the trust
clauses are too indefinite than to all the charges
Of undue influence and fraud made against his
client in the complaint. lie said:
This litigation Is brought only to set aside the trust
clauses the ground, and the sole ground, that they
are indefinite. All these malicious charges agaihss
Mr. Hilton merely brought in to appeal to the gallery
business Mr.. Hilton has been dragged into The com
paut not because has any right there but solely asa
make weight 10 have the trust clauses set ASIDE
special point made by Mr.. Butler in his COM
plaint is that the deed conveying to ex-Judgc
Hilton all the right, title and interest OF A. 1.
Stewart in the business and mills Of A. T. Stewart
& Co., for 81. 100000. which was executed on the
day following the merchants funeral. was ob-
tanned through fraudulent representations, ana
this is alleged to be the entering wedge which
permitted Mr. Hilton to effect the many other
fraudulent transactions charged. MI butiec
claims that the pretended pecuniary consideration
of 81 900 900 had no other basis than tile sl,ooo'-
900 bequeathed by Mr.. Stewart to Mr. iiilton'
and that the latter availed himself OF this
munifcence to defeat the purposes indicated by
the testator and to bring about violation OF MS
trust In Mr. Stewards will, dated March 81,
1883, Mr. Hilton is appointed to act for thd
testator in behalf Of his estate in winding up hS
TO exercise sound discretion in bringing my
part tnelship affairs to O termination and dSchars-
iny all obi ations connected therc"ltn lrus,lps
TO his Judgment that he will 50 act In respccs
thereto rs TO avoid rs far as can be avoided any
UNNECESSARY loss to those connected with me III
business For these services and as a marx OF
regard Mr. Hilton received SlOOO,OOO by The VIII.
Tho deed, however, according 10 Ar. DuIier'
stated that the reasons for Mr. stewards legacy 10
Mir. Hilton we're that the latter might buy ouo
-, ,,tn ss.cf in
"relieyo her Of much OF the care and trouble Oh
managing the estate This deed was eXccuted
over ten years ago and becomes valid by statutory
limitations.
IL the action instituted by Mr.. Butler Is carried
throuph the courts as seems probable from thc
firm stand taken by all persons interested, it bids
fair to be one OF the most memorable cases In
legal history, not alone because Oh thc iaIse
amounts Of money and property in'oNcu anu .no
sensational character Of the charges against thc
principal, and virtually sole defendant, put pe-
cause of tho great prominence and CONSPICUOUS
ability Of tho lawyers engaged In IL. Inc law
firm of Evarts, Choatc Beaman OF whicn slr;
Butler is q member, and which has oeeh r,aneo
to prosecute his SUIT, mas among i.o TT,s
some of the best lawyers In the country. Inc
senior partner Senator Evarts, is conceded to Do
,,nsurpassed by anyone practising In the ota1e
courts in arguments involving intricate points oi
law Joseph II. Choate, the junior partner, IL re-
oarded as ono Of the ablest and most astute law
o,s IN handling witnesses and winning over Juries.
.nd Charles G. Beaman and Charles f. South
mayd have also made regulations at the bar. Ia
assist these there will be tho largo ana adhirapN
"1s,ani1cd forcc in tho firms employ. Ex-JudSa
Russell has not yet decided who will be associated
with him in defending his client. Hoscoe Conk'
ling, George F. Colnstock and benjamin f. Butlea
have been mentioned - among those who are
likely to be retai.cd In behalf OF Mr. Hilton.
hut there is -. authority for stating that any one
of theU. will be engaged
in speaking of the case yesterday wen known
,o,,wer ar the head Of firm which is now en-
caeed in prosecuting an important VIII case ana
who refused to allow his name 10 appear lii coH
nection with any comments said
=. ., y,sh for my opinion in regard TO the probable
you VS., ,ha case OF Butler against Hilton can give
ouser cr SrIedy In five words-the case Viii be com
IL very ou may de nd upon that Mr. Butler -